Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales • Hacker News Board

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#151

Post by testvox » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 7:22 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #135

rufusroflpunch wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rationality, in the economic sense, doesn't mean making objectively correct decisions as perceived from the outside. It means to make decisions in the furtherance of a particular subjective goal. Making decisions that later turn out to be counter to those ends does not mean that person was behaving irrationality, just that they were wrong. In other words, economically irrational actors are individuals who act consist…

> It means to make decisions in the furtherance of a particular subjective goal. The particular subjective goal is “experienced utility”, and economic rationality not only presumes that that can be meaningfully summed across time but also that the decision made will be made with perfect information as to resulting utilities and disutility and maximize the net lifetime experienced utility.

Why would economic rationality assume that the decision made will be made with perfect information as to resulting utilities and disutility and maximize the net lifetime experienced utility?

This seems like a non sequitur, and a really silly assumption. Wouldn't economic rationality assume that the decisions of actors are rational rather than based on perfect information about their consequences?

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#152

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 7:24 PM UTC

linuxftw wrote: post #149

KirinDave wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is not a feature or consequence of capitalism. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for fraud are independent of the economic system itself. This is a pretty lousy comeback to my argument. A better comeback might have been, "Why would economic penalties for fraud be effective if you're arguing that economic self-interest doesn't have a strong effect on the actions of humans?" > For instance…

> This is a pretty lousy comeback to my argument. A better comeback might have been, "Why would economic penalties for fraud be effective if you're arguing that economic self-interest doesn't have a strong effect on the actions of humans?" The statement which I responded to, that capitalism begets fraud as a feature of capitalism, is wholly untrue. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for any crim…

> The statement which I responded to, that capitalism begets fraud as a feature of capitalism, is wholly untrue. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for any crime, whether economic or otherwise, have nothing to do with an economic system. There isn't any other rational response to your claim.

You're projecting an argument onto me that I didn't make nor claim to have. I didn't suggest or imply that all forms of capitalism uniquely generate fraud. They do exist in every system. You're angry with my phrasing not sufficiently hedging your concerns. You're also strictly wrong about how legal and regulatory systems impact economic systems. It's neither true nor true of how the literature evaluates said systems.

> My stance is that economic self-interest is broadly irrefutable, it doesn't require perfect rationality or all (perfect) information.

I think you're wrong, and overreaching with econ-101. This is like saying "Supply and demand is never violated." It's violated all the time.

If we're in the league where "I cite a magazine article" is considered to be a useful citation proving your point, then I cite all of Dan Ariely's work meant for consumption by lay-folk.

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#153

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 7:37 PM UTC

testvox wrote: post #151

dragonwriter wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It means to make decisions in the furtherance of a particular subjective goal. The particular subjective goal is “experienced utility”, and economic rationality not only presumes that that can be meaningfully summed across time but also that the decision made will be made with perfect information as to resulting utilities and disutility and maximize the net lifetime experienced utility.

Why would economic rationality assume that the decision made will be made with perfect information as to resulting utilities and disutility and maximize the net lifetime experienced utility? This seems like a non sequitur, and a really silly assumption. Wouldn't economic rationality assume that the decisions of actors are rational rather than based on perfect information about their consequences?

> Why would economic rationality assume that the decision made will be made with perfect information as to resulting utilities and disutility and maximize the net lifetime experienced utility

I didn't invent rational choice theory, so don't ask me to justify it.

Ok, well, I'll take a stab at it—the whole concept is exquisitely well crafted as a basis for the argument that liberal (in the classical sense) economic, and even political, systems are ideal in terms of experienced human outcome.

> Wouldn't economic rationality assume that the decisions of actors are rational rather than based on perfect information about their consequences?

Economic rationality is defined to include both perfect information and optimality given that information, so there is no “instead of”—your two alternatives are different phrasings of the same thing.

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#154

Post by Spooky23 » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 7:42 PM UTC

DiabloD3 wrote: post #137

Spooky23 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are always going to make choices in their economic self-interest. Why does 89 octane gasoline exist? The magic of solar city is simple -- they figured out how to market easy monthly payments for a big capital investment. People decide to go solar for all sorts of reasons, and financial is usually not the driver. I live in the northeast, and it's marginal value, you save like $20/mo in electric bills and are…

89 and 93 octane isn't the right argument. You need to ask why does gasoline contaminated with ethanol still exist, when all it does is increase the cost of gasoline (per mile), decrease mileage (per gallon), and increase emissions (both per mile and gallon). Drivers would save tons of money if they'd refuse to buy it, we would just need to get enough of us together to get such a thing done.

IIRC, it reduces certain noxious components of air pollution like particulates at the cost of more CO2

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#155

Post by PhasmaFelis » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 7:49 PM UTC

_zachs wrote: post #111

Seems like nothing more than mud-slinging from disgruntled, fired employees. If SolarCity would have had "...tens of hundreds of millions of dollars in phantom revenue that would put them at over a billion in revenue, which I'll leave to you to look up how inaccurate that statement is.

The line is "tens or hundreds of millions of dollars."

It didn't occur to you that that might be a misprint? Nobody says "tens of hundreds."

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#156

Post by linuxftw » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 8:00 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #152

linuxftw wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a pretty lousy comeback to my argument. A better comeback might have been, "Why would economic penalties for fraud be effective if you're arguing that economic self-interest doesn't have a strong effect on the actions of humans?" The statement which I responded to, that capitalism begets fraud as a feature of capitalism, is wholly untrue. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for any crim…

> The statement which I responded to, that capitalism begets fraud as a feature of capitalism, is wholly untrue. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for any crime, whether economic or otherwise, have nothing to do with an economic system. There isn't any other rational response to your claim. You're projecting an argument onto me that I didn't make nor claim to have. I didn't suggest or imply tha…

> You're projecting an argument onto me that I didn't make nor claim to have. I didn't suggest or imply that all forms of capitalism uniquely generate fraud. They do exist in every system. You're angry with my phrasing not sufficiently hedging your concerns. You're also strictly wrong about how legal and regulatory systems impact economic systems. It's neither true nor true of how the literature evaluates said systems.

I'm not projecting anything, your statement reads as

> [companies will commit fraud when the] penalty for fraud is less than the profit of fraud. It's a fundamental feature of capitalism when untethered from objective assessments of value.

To me, you're saying that "fraud is a fundamental feature of capitalism, unless regulated", which implies that fraud is an unavoidable consequence of capitalism unless the authorities step in to prevent it. The tone of your phrasing suggestions specifically that capitalism is directly correlated with fraud. If you didn't intend to make this suggestion, I can understand your consternation to my rebuttal.

Capitalism has nothing to do with fraud. Capitalism has nothing to do with law enforcement and crime punishment.

> If we're in the league where "I cite a magazine article" is considered to be a useful citation proving your point, then I cite all of Dan Ariely's work meant for consumption by lay-folk.

To my point in that article, the 'evidence is everywhere' as illustrated by the broad availability of information to support my claim. Just look at the marketing around electric vehicles and solar in general; you'll see a strong unifying factor of 'economic motivation' in those mediums.

Here's the top result for 'why buy solar' [1]. Top factors are all entirely economic. Clearly, the marketing around these products would prioritize most people's primary motivation for acquiring those products.

[1] https://www.energysage.com/solar/why-go-solar/

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#157

Post by DiabloD3 » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 8:01 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #154

DiabloD3 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

89 and 93 octane isn't the right argument. You need to ask why does gasoline contaminated with ethanol still exist, when all it does is increase the cost of gasoline (per mile), decrease mileage (per gallon), and increase emissions (both per mile and gallon). Drivers would save tons of money if they'd refuse to buy it, we would just need to get enough of us together to get such a thing done.

IIRC, it reduces certain noxious components of air pollution like particulates at the cost of more CO2

It lowers actual octane rating, thus increasing air pollution ever so slightly.

An engine designed entirely for ethanol, not one that just merely takes a mix but is meant for gasoline, would be higher efficiency and be worth it.

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#158

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 8:31 PM UTC

linuxftw wrote: post #156

KirinDave wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The statement which I responded to, that capitalism begets fraud as a feature of capitalism, is wholly untrue. Fraud exists in any economic system, and the punishments for any crime, whether economic or otherwise, have nothing to do with an economic system. There isn't any other rational response to your claim. You're projecting an argument onto me that I didn't make nor claim to have. I didn't suggest or imply tha…

> You're projecting an argument onto me that I didn't make nor claim to have. I didn't suggest or imply that all forms of capitalism uniquely generate fraud. They do exist in every system. You're angry with my phrasing not sufficiently hedging your concerns. You're also strictly wrong about how legal and regulatory systems impact economic systems. It's neither true nor true of how the literature evaluates said system…

> The tone of your phrasing suggestions specifically that capitalism is directly correlated with fraud. If you didn't intend to make this suggestion, I can understand your consternation to my rebuttal.

But not enough to not be defensive about your reading, it seems.

> To my point in that article, the 'evidence is everywhere' as illustrated by the broad availability of information to support my claim.

Oh. That's not a metric I find compelling.

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#159

Post by snoman » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 9:00 PM UTC

princekolt wrote: post #50

mikro2nd wrote: post #44

A trend that's been growing for quite a (long!) while now is exemplified by this article: " Tesla did not respond to Ars’ request for comment on Sunday. " Who in their right minds realistically expects any organisation to respond to some random journalistic enquiry on a Sunday ? The other major variant of this shyster tactic is along the lines of, "Company X failed to respond immediately when asked for comment." No c…

> Who in their right minds realistically expects any organisation to respond to some random journalistic enquiry on a Sunday? Jeez. Considering the story was posted today, what this probably means is that they requested commentary on Sunday, waited for the entirety of Monday, and didn't hear back until today, when they decided to post it.

Far more likely is that it was written on Sunday, didn't get a response by Monday morning, was put into the publishing pipeline/queue right then and there, and cleared the queue and hit the site today.

Re: Ex-SolarCity employees: We were fired after reporting millions in fake sales

#160

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 9:14 PM UTC

DiabloD3 wrote: post #137

Spooky23 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are always going to make choices in their economic self-interest. Why does 89 octane gasoline exist? The magic of solar city is simple -- they figured out how to market easy monthly payments for a big capital investment. People decide to go solar for all sorts of reasons, and financial is usually not the driver. I live in the northeast, and it's marginal value, you save like $20/mo in electric bills and are…

89 and 93 octane isn't the right argument. You need to ask why does gasoline contaminated with ethanol still exist, when all it does is increase the cost of gasoline (per mile), decrease mileage (per gallon), and increase emissions (both per mile and gallon). Drivers would save tons of money if they'd refuse to buy it, we would just need to get enough of us together to get such a thing done.

> You need to ask why does gasoline contaminated with ethanol still exist

The two mandates that together promote this are mandates for share of renewable fuel use and mandates for gasoline oxygenation to reduce carbon monoxide emissions; ethanol-containing gasoline helps meet both mandates (the latter is applicable to certain markets at certain times of year.)

> Drivers would save tons of money if they'd refuse to buy it,

Well, yes, refusing to buy the gas that is sold at the pump would save lots of money.